Anthology entry

[CovenantJr]

Oh, and Khaliban - I've just this moment realised why your post got on my nerves though I do my best to be open to constructive criticism. It's because you were quite condescending. I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't do that again.

Sorry about that. Some writers can be very defensive. Terry Goodkind, for example. I tried to cushion the blow and perhaps cushioned too much.

No problem. I appreciate the advice - new perspectives are always useful. I hope I didn't offend with my terse response.

Having absorbed your advice, I am nonetheless going to follow another piece of advice I was once given by a KW member I hold in high regard and who knows her literature:

Keep writing by your instinct and don't let anybody mess with it

Plus this, on writing in general:

You are looking outward, and that above all you should not do now. Nobody can counsel and help you, nobody. There is only one single way. Go into yourself.

[aliantha]

Thanks for the look, CovJr! Some cool ideas here. But I agree that it could use some pruning....

[CovenantJr]

Thanks for taking the time to comment.

[Loredoctor]

In regards to Khaliban's comment: I used to use alot of purple prose - I use adjectives like there's no tomorrow. BUT I think it is something one should learn to balance. You can go too far, but neither should you moderate it too much. It is necessary to give language 'impact' and emotion. That's why I think Cov Jr is a great writer - because he fuels stories with something unique and poetic. I do think that he may be a slow writer because of the energy (emotion) he places into his writing, but hell, so was I. It will become his natural art. Anyway, I don't need to lecture - he knows.

As to the story, I think there are sections of the first entry that really need to be expanded (the duel and background - world as it was), but then again, they could be dealt with later. There are some original characters - well they 'live', and one of them is quite believable. I also think the same emotional skill you have needs to flesh out the 'post-apocalyptic' feel.

Anyway, well done.

[Khaliban]

Every writer uses purple prose at some point. It's a necessary second stage of development. In the first, you don't say enough. In the second, you say too much. In the third, you learn to balance. I wrote horrendous stuff at that stage, writing I can't bear to look at anymore. It's the stage where you learn how to play with words. It's fun to write but ponderous to read. A single perfect word or clear description per page will stand out more than wave after wave of purple prose.

I would like to point out that my comments were about technique and not content. Content, what you write, what you say with your writing, is very personal. I would never tell another writer what to write. How you write, on the other hand, always has room for improvement.

"We are all apprentices in a profession in which there are no masters."
--Ernest Hemmingway

[CovenantJr]

In my case, it's the first stage. The first thing I wrote came out like that. And, as I mentioned earlier, I can think of few authors as "purple" as Gene Wolfe; clearly he never graduated beyond that stage.

[Loredoctor]

I can think of few authors as "purple" as Gene Wolfe; clearly he never graduated beyond that stage.

Good point! And SRD in the first chronicles!

[CovenantJr]

Indeed. I'm not contesting Khaliban's points, I'm simply observing that with such great variety in people, the variety of authorial styles must surely be almost as huge. Gene Wolfe and old SRD - very elaborately written with a large vocabulary. Mervyn Peake - possibly the most heavily descriptive author I've read. All of them masters of their field.

I don't seek to put myself on the level of such master craftsmen; I'm simply trying to illustrate that not everyone follows the too simple - too complex - balance evolution. To use another example, Runes Discussion has seen much debate on the merits of SRD's new, simplified style versus his old, flowery one. Several (apparently including SRD) prefer the pared-down approach; others, myself included, prefer the previous, ornate style.

In summary: I take all advice and opinions on board, but given the diversity of both approach and opinion, I find the prospect of following the advice of any one person almost ludicrous. I prefer to compose a broader assessment, based on the opinions of as many people as possible.



EDIT: That's a lie. I write what I write and to hell with what anyone thinks of it. I write by personal compulsion, not for any readers. Enjoy or don't, but never try to change it.